advertisement


Charleston church shooting

auric said:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...er-sleuths-found-dylann-roof-s-manifesto.html
Click to expand...

The linked article about racist/fascist groups on Reddit is interesting too: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ston-terror-and-worry-about-the-blowback.html

The US/western reaction to this, or distinct lack thereof, is interesting to contrast with the blind panic regarding Islamic radicalism etc. Exactly the same grade of bullshit, but one is apparently 'free speech' and the other 'terrorism'...

PS I remember a friend suggesting that everything that was good, positive and optimistic about America could be illustrated with the footage of the Apollo 11 launch: the giant shiny rocket lifting mankind upwards to a whole bright new future, the civil rights movement, the jazz age, Woodstock etc. This post-war growth/enlightenment period eventually comes to a grinding halt with almost the exact reverse imagry: footage of 9/11 - a once great towering civilisation crashing downwards into the dirt like a space rocket gone horribly wrong. Time starting to move backwards. De-evolution. It now looks like America has wound time backwards even further to a world of the racism and apartheid of centuries ago. A country where the murder of black people is becoming almost systemic. It is painful to watch.
 
A great way of putting it. The 'War on Terror' is a narrative they decide.

CH9XLDPWwAAsuJU.jpg
 
Paul R said:
The critical factor in this incident isn't weaponry, or access to weaponry.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. Whether you want to call it terror or homicide if this guy had lived in the UK

a) he'd almost certainly not have had a gun: maybe a machete
b) he might have killed one, maybe two, but then he would quickly have been overpowered.

There are mentally ill (and borderline cases) everywhere. The significant difference in the US is that they can get hold of guns and ammunition easily.
 
What's interesting is that mention of his parents is absent from reports (at least here) - even though it was his father who gave him the gun and the poses with it for the camera appear to be at their home.
 
stevec67 said:
I don't know that the conf flag is inherently racist. It's an emblem of the US South, an emblem of the rebel. Yes, it has been adopted by racists and the South were fighting for the right to keep slaves, but not everyone sees it that way. I know I bought a confederate flag headscarf 15 years ago on holiday in that area, used it to keep the sun off. Neither I nor my pal are racists, neither thought it was an unsuitable subject for a scarf. These days I don't wear it, but that's maybe a modified perspective. Certainly a lot of Americans see it as simply "rebel" rather than "slave holding white supremacist rebel".

I know. It really is the Christian belief that sins are forgiven and only God my call you to account. I'm bloody sure I wouldn't be saying "I forgive him, he will be judged by God" 3 days after the shooting if my family were involved. I don't see the families of the victims calling for him to be killed, I suspect they will be the first campaigning for him not to hang but to be imprisoned. I feel the same, he should be given time to reflect on wht he's done.
Click to expand...

It will be quite awhile before the trial even starts and he will be on death row for quite some time before he's executed by lethal injection. He should have plenty of time to reflect. The jurors will determine whether he's executed. I imagine there would be riots if he wasn't sentenced to death.

time_on_dr.png
 
"The jurors will determine whether he's executed."

The Judge will.

Do read before stating your BS.

With all due respect,

John
 
Wilson said:
"The jurors will determine whether he's executed."

The Judge will.

Do read before stating your BS.

With all due respect,

John
Click to expand...

You are incorrect.

Jurors first vote to determine guilt/innocence, and then there is a second phase where they vote for punishment. In a murder trial, jurors are “death qualified” before they can even serve. They must attest that they are willing to impose a death sentence. A death sentence in South Carolina requires that the jury’s decision be unanimous. If a jury can’t reach a unanimous decision for death, the judge will impose a life sentence.
 
TheDecameron said:
What's interesting is that mention of his parents is absent from reports (at least here) - even though it was his father who gave him the gun and the poses with it for the camera appear to be at their home.
Click to expand...

Also why is he being referred to as alleged or suspected, when he's actually admitted to killing, maybe i'm missing some legal issue here :confused:
 
Still Obama has not recognised the racist nature of the crime.

I bet black America wish they had voted for somebody else now!
 
rally said:
Also why is he being referred to as alleged or suspected, when he's actually admitted to killing, maybe i'm missing some legal issue here :confused:
Click to expand...
As auric says, he hasn't been tried yet. After any atrocity there are any number of people, many mentally ill, who will ring up to "confess" to the crime. They are no more guilty than I, just a little more mad. So for now he is still "the man arrested in connection with and charged with the murder of XYZ" .
 
rally said:
Also why is he being referred to as alleged or suspected, when he's actually admitted to killing, maybe i'm missing some legal issue here :confused:
Click to expand...

I always find this perplexing.... The BBC etc always refer to "alleged" even if there is film of a crime being committed! More bizarre though, to me anyway, is that once someone has been found guilty by a court they are referred to "the murderer" (or whatever) even if there is considerable evidence that a miscarriage of justice has occurred. I'm sure it's some legal issue at work but it's as if the media take the decision of a court as absolute 100% true even when there seems good reason to doubt it...
 
Because the decision of the court, however dubious we may find it, is "a fact" until otherwise proven.
Therefore until the court has decided, beyond reasonable doubt, then the suspect is innocent until proven. Once proven, it's "proven". End of discussion, that's proof. Even if it later tunrs out to be wrong. It's right until it's proven wrong.
 
Hook said:
You are incorrect.

Jurors first vote to determine guilt/innocence, and then there is a second phase where they vote for punishment. In a murder trial, jurors are “death qualified” before they can even serve. They must attest that they are willing to impose a death sentence. A death sentence in South Carolina requires that the jury’s decision be unanimous. If a jury can’t reach a unanimous decision for death, the judge will impose a life sentence.
Click to expand...

That's my understanding.
 
I'm sure it's some legal issue at work but it's as if the media take the decision of a court as absolute 100% true even when there seems good reason to doubt it...
Click to expand...
I expect someone is guilty until the judgement is overturned by the supreme / high court otherwise we would have the popular press and assorted pressure groups writing and rewriting the law whenever they felt the urge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top